Clash more pretentious than Yes
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56975
Printed Date: August 11 2025 at 04:21
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Clash more pretentious than Yes
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Subject: Clash more pretentious than Yes
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 17:29
|
Consider this, Yes TFTO ocean is often cited by some as the beginning of the end for prog, because it's detractors consider too over the to, lacking substance, that this is why prog had to end. Well if that is true, why didn't Sadinista by the Clash signify the the end for punk? it was a three disc over the top mess, and unlike TFTO which has strong admirers Sadinista is almost universally panned. So to me this shows how one sided the industry is, a band that is more than musically competent and competent enoughdoes something bold and they are scorned, while another band that pretty underwhelming in musicality does something sprawling beyond their own ability and are still considered heroes today. Just remeber this if any punk/hipster say prog rock was too pretentious just answer back Sadinista! that should shut them up, after all Yes weren't too arrogant to say that they were the only band that mattered like the Clash did.  also of note Clash leader Joe Strummer was a rich boy the son of a diplomat and went to boarding school, while Jon Anderson was not so privileged had less oppurtunites (his daughter went to boarding school to get the education he didn't get) and had to work on farms and drive taxis before creating Yes, so folks I believe the Clash was pretentious, and some working class band needs to shake the industry up to stop this upper class pretentious nonsense, I nominate Yes. ------------- |
Replies:
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 17:34
|
Yeah and ugly dudes to boot! Rotting teeth , smell of puke on their clothes and all......wealthy beyond Bentleys, go figure...... ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 17:44
So? If anything that´s admirable, Strummer had no need to be a left wing individual and still did, not ´cause he desperatly needed change or more opportunities, but because he saw his own side as being wrong and went against his upbringing and what he was taught to preach about (what he thought to be) something better for the common good, not just his own. How this is an argument against the Clash is beyond me.  ------------- "You want me to play what, Robert?" 
|
Cheesecakemouse wrote:Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 17:53
Mate, I'm pointing out the irony of the music press and how unfair they are to prog and what they say, not so much the clash  Anyway some of Clash detractors believe all that political stuff was just chic to look hip rather than true sincerity, but thats just an opinion, I don't mind their music I own give them rope. This is more the irony of the critical community and their arguments against prog etc. ------------- |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 18:04
Exactly, why be so touchy and forgiving about these mega-rock stars? You think the Stones, the Clash or other "working class" groups really live in average conditions, with average homes, eating average food and riding a bike to work. Hmmmmmm, where is the strong coffee , I need some NOW ? ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: King Crimson776
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 18:26
How about, if some hipster says prog is pretentious, just ask him why that even matters?  No really, has anyone thought of that? There's no way they'd have an answer. As for the Clash and the irony of the music press, I agree completely... though somehow I doubt the old geezers from Yes are going to "shake up the industry" again.
|
Posted By: Hercules
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 18:54
|
I saw The Clash live in about 1980 and I've honestly derived more pleasing from hearing someone having a bad attack of wind than listening to them. It was a spectacular waste of an hour of my life. I had to listen to dreadful music, badly played; got spat on, pushed over, jumped on and finally ended up punching a fan who spat in my face and thought it funny. At that point, I sort of left (I was about to be thrown out). And it was all so completely pretentious. Many of the audience were middle/upper class students (I was doing post doctoral work at Imperial College, London at the time, and knew many of them by sight) and the band were clearly not "yer average workin' class 'eroes". Most of them would have had kittens if a real revolution had come along. They'd have been first up against the wall. 30 years on, I do voluntary work promoting maths learning in a local secondary school; the headteacher has a picture of Joe Strummer on the wall of his office and takes the p**s out of me for liking prog. And he's an ex public schoolboy. Says it all. ------------- A TVR is not a car. It's a way of life. |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 20:57
|
O.K., here we go again - we use an analogy based on incorrect & incomplete info to prove how put upon poor prog is compared to a disliked music of another genre.
TFTO did not kill prog. It was a very BIG target that critics could hardly be expected to pass up.
So let's set the record straight(er) - Yes came back with Relayer, Floyd continued with WYWH, Animals, The Wall; Gentle Giant , Genesis, Eloy, Tull, Fripp, and many others kept making & selling albums after TFTO.
Now, for the other side - Sandinista was derided by many at the time of its' release. For the amount of music, for the variety of genres that included many non-punk musiques, along with the accusation of hubris. Yet, like many prog "artistes" they stood by their work and accepted the bad with the good. They had put out the album that they wanted to put out. They had not bowed to record label pressure to edit it down to a single LP. They had not bowed to the pressure from some of their fans to play "punk"music. They had refused the position of "leaders" or "guiding lights" of punkdom. I.E. , they followed their own plan ! And so , with time, they have managed to see this album be held in high regard by many music fans, including myself. I prefer their first. I am not a punk rock fanatic, but I like some of the music, just as with most other genres.
And one thing I too often see on this site is the "oh poor pitiful me, the prog fan". Prog got, gets and will never get the respect it deserves. The rest of the world has it all worng. Shouldn't they know better ?
Enough ! Prog is still around, has enjoyed a commercially successful golden age, has endured dry spells, and is very much alive now.
If you're expecting to see a prog band top the top 40, well guess what - not too many acts do so. And those that do aren't all from any specific genre. So if there's a 2 miilion selling rap album up there, there are also a million non-selling rap albums out there.
SO get over it. Your "prog" is not being persecuted, nor was it ever singled out. Not anymore than any other popular music genre.
So let's finish with a quote from Dolly Parton - get off the cross, someone else needs the wood. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 21:13
Your copious rant is absolutely correct and I wouldn't change a thing! I , as a progfan, actually enjoy being cast as an elitist outsider and I would never wish for another "glory" period where prog would rule the airwaves (as Thomas Dolby once proclaimed). The premise for this thread is that Yes and others were branded as pretentious and the claim here is that , frankly, any kind of artist is ,by social standards alone, a spotlight-enhanced figure of reverence, whether you have 5, or 50.000 fans watching your every move. I remember attending a Duran Duran concert (the Rio period) where the roadies where tagging the babes with numbers for the after-show carnal festivities . Most musicians will tell you that a guitar, a mike and a pose WILL get you laid by both sexes (according to some...). The Clash , the Pistols etc... were also elitist and in fact, uber-pretentious because they sought to "progress" by slamming rage and anger upon the audience as a vehicle to get to fame , fortune and some ass. Nothing wrong with that mind you but it is a game, after all...... The oldest one.....In fact, punk faded rather quickly away for a multitude of the same reasons prog vanished from the charts. Most people still like simple pop songs , disposable and ultimately worthless in terms of musical legacy...... Sad but true.... Now can I go back to my wooden hovel? ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 21:40
|
All true. If you're not looking for attention, you stay in your basement & keep your art to yourself.
And even Johnny Rotten has said that getting your ass on a stage, or your music on a record (CD nowadays) requires some pretension on your part. LIke why you and not someone else.
Mind you, he did speak out about the quick conformity that punk soon engendered - mohawks, leather, spikes, spitting. What had started as a DIY, be you rself whatever that is scene became another "club" defined by its' dress & politics. HE even referred to the Clash's lyrical approach as being too "politics 101". He rather preferred to write about whatever came out - angst, anger, ridicule, art , whatever. If you have to force it , F it./
As for glory periods and radio, the era of radio's relevance and rule as an arbiter and dissimilator of good music are long gone. The mainstream is no more, the niche rules, and the internet, community radio, and the alternative press (i.e. the small mags that aren't Rolling Stone, Spin, NME, and the like) offer enough to support a vibrant music scene like we have not seen since the 70s.
Whatever it is that you like, you can find out about, then find it, and then find out that you're not alone in being interested in it. Sounds great for finding great sounds ~ ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: mr.cub
Date Posted: April 06 2009 at 22:26
|
Interesting point but what about London Calling? A dual-disc masterpiece. I actually give The Clash a lot of credit because they evolved tremendously over their short career and really became adept at what they could and could not do (London Calling is a prime example of genre hopping mastery in my eyes). I cannot stand other groups that are labeled as punk because they never took the risks The Clash did.
I don't find either band pretentious to say the least. Yes could write music like no other group and perform it at the highest emotional and technical levels. The Clash could write succinct and widely eclectic music that quickly broke them from 'punk' cliches. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: April 07 2009 at 02:02
|
I remember reading, I think it was in Slate, that the Clash never considered themselves a "punk rock" band, just a plain old rock band. So if a lot of their music doesn't sound like archetypical punk then there's a very good reason for that. But, yeah, it's kinda funny how the bands and singer-songwriters who cultivate a "salt of the earth" image (see also: Bruce Springsteen) rarely have the credentials to back it up, but those who actually come from the slums are more likely to go on to write sophisticated and genre-redefining music: The Beatles, Black Sabbath, Roxy Music, Type O Negative and so on. (interestingly, Type O Negative are perhaps the most prominent outspokenly right-wing band in rock right now) ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: April 07 2009 at 03:35
|
@debrewguy
You are my idol man! 10/10. I honestly thought the first five minutes of TFTO was some of the best prog ever. Good points raised here from everyone. I personally thought posting a topic titled "Clash more pretentious than Yes" is a pretty pretentious thing to do. ------------- 
|
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: April 07 2009 at 12:20
|
This is only semi-relevant, but as a punk fan, I felt moved to post this, an excerpt from "White Punks on Hope" by the British band Crass: Punk was once an answer to years of crap,
A way of saying no where we'd always said yep. But the moment we saw a way to be free, They invented a dividing line, street credibility. The qualifying factors are politics and class, Left wing macho street fighters willing to kick arse. They said because of racism they'd come out on the street. It was just a form of fascism for the socialist elite. Bigotry and blindness, a marxist con, Another clever trick to keep us all in line. Neat little labels to keep us all apart, To keep us all divided when the troubles start. ------------- My other avatar is a Porsche It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased. -Kehlog Albran |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: April 07 2009 at 13:09
|
I always though that The Clash were more of an honest rock band than many of their punk peers - I thought that much of the Sex Pistols, Damned, & etc. was pretentious crap with the industry trying to kid the kids that this was hip, cool, and they had "blown away" all of the old dinosaurs. Of course, looking back over the past 23 years or so, we can all look with huge amusement at the nostalgia industry that has grown up around punk and the extremely sad reunion tours of the kids who would never grow old and pander to the establishment. Rotten, Vicious, Sid Snot (the Everett parody of punk) et al were a bunch of very sad, art college youths, and not very good musically at that. At least prog bands were honest in their endeavours. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 07 2009 at 14:11
|
Prog bands honest in their endeavours ? And pray tell they were what ?
Rotten has never hidden his openness to being paid ridiculous amounts of money to re-unite. So what ?
Agani , we seem to believe that our little prog world consists of esthetes, charitably providing high art for the masses or the elites, motivated only by the pleasure of knowing that they were elevating culture.
They expressed themselves the way they wanted to. Nothing more, nothing less. And their chosen music genre serves no other purpose than a way to class their music for the benefit of critics and academics, and to occasionally help interested music fans seek out their music.
Please, this constant repetition of prog's supposed purity of purpose, of its' higher level of artisitic merit, is Bullsh*t.
It is music that some, but not all , enjoy. NO more important than any other. The only measure being the end listener's enjoyment of the music. And anyone who has to rely on "descriptions" or "classifications" to get this out of music is getting it wrong.
Music is not something to measure. You listen to it. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Lost Follower
Date Posted: April 07 2009 at 18:11
|
Sandinista was toilet. But those of us who saw the Clash at their peak - '77/'79 - will understand and cherish those moments forever. without a doubt the greatest live band I ever saw (and there's a huge list). Incendary beyond belief when they got it right. But you need the right mind set to understand I'm afraid.
------------- ~Jump you f**ker jump~ |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: April 08 2009 at 04:38
|
I don't dislike the Clash music, i've got give 'em rope, and will probably pick up london's burning, I was merely trying to articulate how one sided the music media is, how you can turn any criticism around a put it towards any group. And debrewguy, you got it wrong I didn't say TFTO killed prog, that is merely an argument that many put forward. I also believe that it is necessay for members to express how difficult they feel prog is being treated by the mainstream, the forum is a great place for people to express their frustrations and feel empowered that they have a voice and a place to express themselves that is not monopolised by a handful of onesided critics. I say you better get used to it, there will always people here that express it, it gives people an independant voice, if there is one good thing that the internet has done is that itrs given speech to the common people and taken it away from an oligarchy of tone deaf self-important baffoons (ie music critics). ------------- |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: April 08 2009 at 13:02
|
"pretentious" is a critics only real weapon. For some reason the word terrifies people. If a critic just says an album is bad, no one really cares because they can hear whether its good or bad since its opinion. But as soon as an album is labeled "pretentious" people run screaming even if they haven't heard the thing. I guess they take it personal that an artist is supposedly (according to the critic) promoting itself as better than them. Its rather ridiculous. Honestly, I don't think either Yes (maybe Wakeman), or the Clash extended themselves into the land of pretensions. Both played a different style of rock and roll, and both albums mentioned TFTO, and Sandinista! are excellent. Sandinista is possibly my number 1 or 2 Clash album. Its great. Let the critics be the dicks that they are, thats what they're paid for, unfortunately.
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 00:35
|
All music not made by me is pretentious.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 02:22
|
Only hippies and nerds listen to music with more than three chords anyway. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 02:30
|
Sandanista pretentious? Absolute hogwash. This has to be one of the seminal albums from that era, clever, intelligent, inventive, conceptual, brilliant, etc etc etc
In saying that pretentious is not a bad thing especially in progressive terms and Yes IMO only really got pretentious on Union onwards excluding Talk. I could never label Clash pretentious, sorry. Fashion dates but music is more definable in pretentious terms. Now if you were comparing ELP to Yes  ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Lost Follower
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 03:10
And if you're listening to Eno, you migt get away with only one chord. Chords are boring. More indescriminate noise please. ------------- ~Jump you f**ker jump~ |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 04:09
|
^
Try Talk Talk's Spirit of Eden too. ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Sacred 22
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 21:31
| Yes never pretended; they were the real deal. |
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: April 09 2009 at 22:03
You, good sir, are correct. the words we use to label music does in no way change said music. Musical enjoyment is a subjective opinion, and casting ill maligned threats of "pretentious" are very much hollow. Casting out a term like "hypocrite" is a waste of time, as well. May I ask, If a hypocrite believes 2 + 2 = 4, is he wrong? The terms we use to describe musical genres aren't real. The are just ideas we've manufactured as an attempt to control and confine reality, which I feel is in the end impossible. Some of these ideas are so relative and opinion based as to might as well not even exist. I agree with you, good sir. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: April 10 2009 at 06:22
What is that even supposed to mean, beyond the totally obvious aspect? -------------
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 11 2009 at 23:16
You mean someone thought they were make-believe ? ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: April 12 2009 at 01:02
One thing that Rotten/Lyndon still doesn't admit to was the fact that Pistols were actually designed by Malcom McClaren to promote his girlfriend's clothing designs for his sex shop. I always found that irritating with the Pistols, they claim they are as honest as hell, but them keep denying that they were a manufactured boy band. For a band that had an album called Never Mind the Bollocks, they spoke a lot of bollocks, especially on that doco the Filth and the Fury, and also to this day deny being influenced by the Bay City Rollers. But all the same, even though I take what the guy says with a grain of salt, I think there is truth in what he is saying in your quote. ------------- |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: April 12 2009 at 01:39
|
Interesting discussion certainly. Reductio ad absurdum: Even at the very basic level of private communication between individuals, the very act of articulating your ideas can be dismissed by the other as 'pretentious' In the public domain, surely esoteric ability has to exist before anyone can perceive a differential merit in a communication? It's scarcity alone that confers a value to any phenomenon be it coal, diamonds or triple albums from UK rock bands... Yep, 'Sandinista' was poo in it's triple guise, but could have been condensed down into a killer double album just on the strength of the music alone. The risible concept re empathy and identification with South American revolutionaries was complete and utter hollow cant unrivalled even in the fantasy primer output of those gritty realists 'Yes'. Furthermore: Why is it that an individuals social origins are construed as contradicting a political orientation formed over time as they approach maturity ? Surely the son of a diplomat is entitled to have left wing views if his life experience tells him this is a just perspective ? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: April 12 2009 at 02:05
I agree about that communication, prog and punk at the basic level just forms of communication. As for my mention about Joe Strummer's upbringing that is more to point out the flaw in that statement that most critics make about punk being the expression of the frustrations of the lower class and prog just being upper class. I am pointing out that these statements are baseless generalisations, but yet put forth by so called 'experts' - Rolling Stone magazine etc. ------------- |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: April 12 2009 at 05:18
|
It has to be said, the punks were much more pretentious than the proggers. The proggers were a close second though.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Sacred 22
Date Posted: April 13 2009 at 16:20
The statement assumes that both Yes and The Clash are pretentious. The question is asked if one is more pretentious than the other. All I am saying is Yes is not pretentious. I don't believe that Yes pretened to be something they are not.
Pretentious
Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified.
Pretend
the enactment of a pretense; "it was just pretend" [syn: make-believe]
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: April 13 2009 at 17:22
mmmmmmmmmhhhh............
 Punk was already over by 78. It lasted from Aug 76 (and the Mont De Marsan festival in France) until end pf 77. Most punk purists will tell you do. The next groups were called new wave (sort of inveted by Melody Maker, in response to NME launching Punk as their "thing ">> Sounds will invent NWOBHMB in 70), even if in Northern America New Wave meant early 80's electro-pop groups.
The Clash were seen as mega sell-outs already after London Calling's success. Real punk groups did not release albums, they releasqed singles and EP's.
Now why would NME shooy its own punk baby, right????
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: Lost Follower
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 03:35
As someone who was there (My first Clash gig was November '76) I can confirm that by early '78 a large portion of the UK punk scene (which was still pretty small in terms of numbers) considered 'PUNK' the movement (as opposed to punk rock the genre) to be finished. I hated 50% of London Calling, I thought it was Karaoke Clash, this is our Rockabilly tune, this is our disco tune, this is our pnk tune etc etc... Instead of staying with a vision and creating something of their own, they just copped a lot of other peoples styles. Mildly entertaining but hardly inventive. The term 'New Wave' was coined by Malcolm MaClaren early on. He took it from the early 60's French film movement of the same name, considering the new scene (4 groups at most) to be comparable. But of course, what it came to represent was people like The Cars and The Knack. Dreadful middle aged musicians who thought that wearing a skinny tie made them hip. The very people who would have bemoaned the early punk scenes lack of technical ability. One of my favourite responses to the musicianship debate at the time was from Glen Matlock at an early Sex Pistols gig... "You can't play" yelled the hippy in the front row.."Yeah, so what?" was the response. Magic. Frankly, when it comes to attitude, I'm amazed that The Clash and YES can even be mentioned in the same breath, let alone the same subject of a thread. To quote the great man "Like trousers like brain". ------------- ~Jump you f**ker jump~ |
Posted By: Lost Follower
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 03:37
Well as real as you can get singing abour Faeries and hob goblins. ------------- ~Jump you f**ker jump~ |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 03:48
Oh my god... finally someone who feels about London Calling exactly the same way I do. Last year I bought it only to be really perplexed by how good it was seen as for the very reason you mention. If I want some artsy, weird punk rock I'll put on later Black Flag, thank you!  ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: Lost Follower
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 03:50
I'd suggest Wire myself. One of the greats to come out of London in '77. Still making great music to this day. ------------- ~Jump you f**ker jump~ |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 03:55
When it comes to top albums you just can't trust critics can you! So Black Flag is artsy eh? I'll have to check them out one of these days. ------------- |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 04:01
Yeah... lots of surprisingly complex rhythms, weird time signatures and creative use of guitar feedback. They're not just one of the few 1980s hardcore punk bands who had the same artsy streak as proto-punk but "proper" punk mostly threw out the window in the mid-1970s, they actually got more experimental with each album. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: Cheesecakemouse
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 04:06
They sound really interesting, I'll have to sample some of their stuff one of these days. ------------- |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 13:29
first a quick comment about your signature - are we about to become the AC/DC tsunami that will overwhelm the purists here at PA Second, it is amazing how few people know that Art in music exists outside of Prog, classical, folk or jazz music. Third, one must question those who bought, borrowed, or somehow picked up albums like London Calling and are unable to see what the big hubbub was about after a few listens; while insisting that prog albums must be listened to many many times to appreciate their superiority to other genres' releases. London Calling will stand as one of the classics in the Rock n Roll pantheon. It is not a favourite of mine, but I have more than a few friends (mostly with a wide variety of musical tastes, and also of different age groups) that love it. And for a prog fan to not recognize the fact that this Punk figurehead was risking its' standing by not just straying, but jumping completely out of the genre stereotypes to make the music they wanted is befuddling. Whatever they were, they were the Clash. And just like some prog bands, they played what they wanted, and they didn't always stick to what their fan base expected or wanted. And the shameful comparison for Prog fans is that most Clash fans were able to accept their idols playing some music that was more mainstream or pop because the Clash wanted to play it. The Clash plays a reggae tinged tune. Fine ! The Clash play an R & B flavoured song. Alright ! The Clash play a song you can dance to. Woohoo ! Let's infiltrate the mass media ! No need to mention Yes or Genesis, eh ... and the reaction that their followers have to certain periods in their respective careers ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 16:59
|
I might give London Calling some more listens in the future... haven't heard it in ages, actually, but to be honest it's possible I'll change my mind. It's just that I didn't find anything much potentially interesting so far.
------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: Gustavo Froes
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 20:03
|
"I don't even have to listen to their music,just looking at one of their album covers makes me sick already".
Joe Strummer,about Led Zeppelin.
This is worse than pretentious.Who are they,or the Sex Pistols,or anyone else,to make three corded songs with completly banal composition and absolute zero substance,and announce themselves as the second coming?Now,just because their music is not complex or 'demanding' doesn't mean they are not pretentious,just in a differen't(much worse)way.And I do enjoy some classic punk rock.Just tell me what these guys would rely upon if it wasn't for some charming lyrics and atittude.
At least Yes made it about the music,and left the rest for us to decide...
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 21:14
|
Gustavo, do you think thatsome musicians in other more " musically superior" genres did not share in this kind of attitude about music that they disliked ? You must have heard of Jazzbos dismissing out of hand the very possibility that Jazz Rock / Fusion players even merited comparison to their own greats. Or how about classical musicians finding the very idea that even the most sophisticated rock music (as proclaimed by its' fans) even matched the High Art of Beethoven , Back or Mozart; not to mention lesser known composers, that some of them snort in derision ? So for any act to "rely" on something is a strange comment. The Clash attracted their fans by the simple fact that people liked their music. Be it for its' supposed political slant, or its' rebellious pose, does not matter. And you'll find Clash fans who hate Cut the Crap. Just like you have Yes fans who dislike 90125. As for substance, banality, or any other "criteria" you want to set up as a guide to quality ... well, remember this - the listener enjoys a piece of music for what it is. If you like atonality, and love Univers Zero for this, then you can say that is why you enjoy it. Your wife may find them annoying for this same reason, yet this likely won't affect your reaction to UZ's music, except to only play when she's not around. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Gustavo Froes
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 21:28
Quite so.However,what annoys me about this so called punk atittude is the priceless arrogance,not by any means related to the music.As I mentioned in my previous post,I enjoy uncompromised punk rock as did The Ramones or even Green Day,who very rarely appealed to arguments as that used by Joe Strummer.If I personsally dislike London Calling,and happen to be very fond of Nevermind(and I know it's not punk
),it concerns the music alone.There was simply no reason for punk rockers to treat early 70s music(including prog) as an unecessary evil,and that's as pretentious as one can possibly get. |
Posted By: mr.cub
Date Posted: April 14 2009 at 21:53
I also have thought of the exact same thing, but really I feel this is simply a counter argument of mine defending Prog Rock. I do enjoy the Clash and other classic punk like you; however, I do think punk rock in general is very much like you mentioned, pretentious in its ideology but minimalistic in its music. I'm no longer worried about the image of Prog against Punk because I feel the music speaks for itself... -------------
|
Posted By: Lost Follower
Date Posted: April 15 2009 at 03:39
Either you get it, or you don't get it my friend. Sadly you are in the latter camp. ------------- ~Jump you f**ker jump~ |
Posted By: Gustavo Froes
Date Posted: April 15 2009 at 08:11
...I beg your pardon?
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: April 15 2009 at 15:18
|
Judging music based on its' performers public persona is like judging a painting by the frame. What is within is what counts. Remember, Liam Gallagher had quite the attitude, Rick Wakeman isn't exactly a reticent type when he wants to. Fripp has never come across as low in self esteem. Attitude is attitude. And in the entertainment field ( and yes, even prog rock is entertainment), public personas are sometimes nothing more than a show. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: April 15 2009 at 15:34
Black Flag was awesome. Check out Damaged, the obvious classic, and then my favorite, and quite strange My War.
I didn't know having a negative opinion towards Led Zeppelin made one pretentious. Led Zeppelin based their music on the blues. A "simple" folk style using only 3 chords and plenty of times about "simple" subjects. The Clash had more than attitude, and apparently "charming lyrics. Their music was interesting and fused with other styles not typical of the 3 chord, sloppy blaze attributed to many other punk rock kings. And last I checked The Clash never tried to pass off other peoples' songs as their own. The Clash never told anyone what to like or dislike, they only expressed what they did or did not like. So who's decisions were taken away? |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: April 17 2009 at 08:57
It pains me to admit this, but the foregoing is quite brilliant. -------------
|
Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 17:29
|
Music critics are pretty much useless.
They don't give a sh*t about the music, ever. That's why most album reviews today don't even concern the music in any way. Seriously, read a Springsteen review, the music is never relevant. It's always about "Springsteen's working class roots" and his politics.
Critics care about the image, the philosophy that goes with it. They can't listen to music for mere enjoyment, they gotta pretend that it's "for the working class" and even though they're all over-privilaged art school snobs, that makes them feel better about themselves. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 19:32
|
The question "who is more pretentious" is impossible to answer since there are no measurement units for social interactions. If you ever went on stage with a guitar in your hand, that's pretentious to a degree. Whether you want to fulfill your rock 'n' roll dream about fame, money, chicks and Cadillacs, or to show people how good technician you are, be it able to play ultra fast shredding or 51/8 time measure, or simple to let people know your poetry and thinking about the world, if you want to pretend you're someone else, if you're introvert and shy and just playing three quiet chords in a background of a folk duet - it's all the same. One of question in modern philosophy is - could art itself exist if there's no one to experience that art? So it's all down to one's taste, and pretentiousness (or lack thereof) doesn't matter. Just think what you think and listen what you like. |
Posted By: boo boo
Date Posted: May 24 2009 at 20:05
|
Pretentious is mostly a useless criticism because ALL music is pretentious. But I agree with the op, people throw the pretentious thing at prog all the time, and even as a punk lover, punk was a lot more pretentious.
I don't know many prog bands who claimed to be musical saviors, but that's what the punk rock brand was all about. To save rock n roll from the "corporate" prog rock.
And even though we now have pop punk, post grunge, nu metal, emo, screamo, metalcore, and all the crappy lo fi indie and hardcore we have now. We have punk to thank for that.
People talk about the upper class upbringing of prog bands. They don't mention The Clash, who had upper class upbringings and here they are being praised as working class heroes. How is that not pretentious? Or hypocritical for that matter?
How is art punk not pretentious? They also make super long songs, concept albums, double albums, lyrics based on literature. Other than the lack of chops, what's the difference?
All that these music critics have taught us is that technical skill = pretentious.
When Syd Barrett cluelessly noodled away at his guitar for what seemed like hours, it was art.
When Gilmour took his place, no matter how brilliantly composed his solos were, it was w**k.
Hawkwind and Can were the least instrumentally competent of the big prog bands and that's why most punk fanboys are quick to say they were the only good ones. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs/?chartstyle=LastfmSuicjdeGirls" rel="nofollow">
|